How do lenses "resolve" higher megapixels? I keep hearing this on some YouTube videos.

[dpitt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

11 hours ago, Photoworks said:

well the APO 50mm is already very good, and some people have the need for it.

this is an R lens 50 mm and the 50 Leica apo on SL2, you already can see a difference.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Interesting. And it shows that the APO 50 is better (should be). If you also have the SL (24 MP), repeat the same scene with both lenses and then compare with the results of the SL2. I think the difference between APO 50 and 50 R will look pretty much the same. And I think the resolution of the SL2 will show through, even on the 50 R. That is what I was trying to say.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[roelandinho]

14 hours ago, UliWer said:

To sum it up: „Resolution“ of your photos is always the sum of the sensor‘s and the lenses capabilities to resolve. With a „bad“ lens your sensor won‘t become „bad“, but show what can be resolved with this combination. Your sensor won‘t be „underresolved“. With a very good lens, your sensor - any sensor - won‘t become better, and certainly not „outresolved“. 

It's not the sum, but the product! This makes it easy to see why you get the most benefit upgrading the *weakest* part of the system. (Proof left to the reader, hint: look at the partial derivatives of the total quality of the system function.)

[Photoworks]

11 hours ago, dpitt said:

Interesting. And it shows that the APO 50 is better (should be). If you also have the SL (24 MP), repeat the same scene with both lenses and then compare with the results of the SL2. I think the difference between APO 50 and 50 R will look pretty much the same. And I think the resolution of the SL2 will show through, even on the 50 R. That is what I was trying to say.

not sure how you get to that conclusion, the image on the SL will still be sharp on the Apo, and less details on the older lens.

[dpitt]

4 hours ago, Photoworks said:

not sure how you get to that conclusion, the image on the SL will still be sharp on the Apo, and less details on the older lens.

It is not a conclusion of mine. It is just a hunch based on previous experiences. I want to see the test before drawing a conclusion, because these pictures do not exactly prove my statement. IMO lenses are only out resolved by sensors if they do not show the improved resolution when comparing the same scenes shot by a sensor with more MP.

The pictures you showed clearly show what a great lens the APO is. My point is that even the lesser lens will show improvement of the increase in sensor resolution. If not then I rest my case and conclude that the old lens is not fit for the SL2. The other thing which would interest me is the question if the APO will really be shining through as much compared to the R lens on the SL (so even on lower resolution). I think it will, but will only know if I see the pictures.

What I am saying now is just an extrapolation of what I saw when comparing the Canon 5D Mk1(12 MP) with Leica R8+DMR(10 MP) and Leica M9(18 MP)  + Nikon D810 (36 MP) and comparing lenses (APO and non-APO) on those sensors.

Edited April 19, 2023 by dpitt

[Photoworks]

13 hours ago, dpitt said:

The pictures you showed clearly show what a great lens the APO is. My point is that even the lesser lens will show improvement of the increase in sensor resolution. If not then I rest my case and conclude that the old lens is not fit for the SL2. The other thing which would interest me is the question if the APO will really be shining through as much compared to the R lens on the SL (so even on lower resolution). I think it will, but will only know if I see the pictures.

Not sure why it matters, the older lenses have what they call a vintage look, and there are plenty of applications for that.

The SL at 24mp produces sharp images, so It will look the same at 24mp. More MP will only give you the same character in a large size.

 

[Kwesi]

On 4/18/2023 at 5:53 PM, kinetic said:

Yes, I think that's the part I feel like is hand-wavy voodoo. Everything else everyone has been commenting here makes sense.

The reason why I'm interested is I have the 50mm Summilux Black Chrome, and I'm considering the new FLE 2 version. I think it's clear that there's a difference in close focusing and aperture blades (though in practice not sure how much the extra 2 blades will matter), but the "resolving" claims that the new one has over the previous lux version just seems really based on nothing, especially for the M11. Not sure it will matter to me for making the decision to switch, but I was wondering if there was some huge thing I was missing here that should make it way more obvious to get the newer lens for whatever reason because of the M11 sensor. So far it doesn't seem like my black chrome is lacking enough in the "resolving" category to be a big factor to consider.

@kinetic I have the 50 lux ASPH BC and the silver M11 and got a chance to play with both the black and silver versions of the new 50 lux asph at Leica store SF last Friday. 
here are my thoughts. The new Len’s is gorgeous- reminds me of a mini 50/0.95. I shot with it using the visoflex and there is a soft detent when you go past 0.7m. Because you are restricted to just the tab, focussing below .7m feels a little awkward. Image quality wise, I couldn’t tell a difference between the old and new for closeup wide open in store portraiture. Handling wise the Black chrome feels very different due to its barrel design and I prefer that. I wouldn’t give up my black chrome for it. I simply have too much history with it. I would like to own both though. 
As far as resolving power is concerned, all my M lenses (28/2,v2   35FLE,v1  50/2 rigid,v2  90/2.8  50 lux BC) are fantastic on the M11. 
 

[RexGig0]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I do, firmly, believe that “sample variation” exists, among Leica lenses. If I have a known-good lens, that does what I want/need it to do, I would be hesitant to sell or trade it, to enable “upgrading” to a successor lens. Not being a fan of focusing tabs, unless I am distance/scale-focusing with a wide-angle lens, I would rather not sell or trade my known-good, pre-II Summilux-M 50mm ASPH for a lens that has only a tab, with no ribs/grooves/texture on its focusing ring. Even without sentimental value being a factor, my pre-II ASPH is virtually certain to stay with me.

Notably, I bought my Summilux-M 50mm ASPH pre-owned, in pristine, pre-loved condition. I tested it on at least two different demonstrator Leica M cameras, at the camera store, before deciding to buy it, and then tested it on the new M10 camera, that I bought, at the same time. I knew it was a good sample, before I opened my wallet.

The 50 ASPH II’s lack of ribs or other texture, on the focusing ring, is not a automatic “deal killer,” but, it would require something substantial to sway my opinion. Close-focusing capability will not sway me, because I have an APO Summicron-M 75mm ASPH, which has a magnification factor at its MFD of 0.7m, that is a close-enough match to the magnification factor of the 50 ASPH II at its MFD of 0.45m. (See Jonathan Slack’s article on the 50 ASPH II.)

I have yet to see anyone declaring that the new ASPH II produces images with a perceptible better result. I await such results, with an open mind.

Edited April 20, 2023 by RexGig0